Buddhism cult

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Buddhism cult

Post by ignobleone »

Cittasanto wrote:
ignobleone wrote: buddhists = have sadha, non-buddhists = don't have
buddhist = Buddha follower, Mr. Gotama = follows himself? Please give me a break!
so a non-buddhist can not have faith that there is enlightenment, a way to enlightenment, and those who have practiced rightly so can declare that path? I think the Jain have faith, maybe from a Buddhist perspective in the wrong place but they have faith.
Please differentiate between "can not have" and "don't have". "Don't have" doesn't mean "can not have".
In Buddhist context, 'faith' means faith in Tathagata.
Of course if you talk about Jainism, 'faith' means faith in Jainism.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Buddhism cult

Post by Cittasanto »

ignobleone wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:
ignobleone wrote: buddhists = have sadha, non-buddhists = don't have
buddhist = Buddha follower, Mr. Gotama = follows himself? Please give me a break!
so a non-buddhist can not have faith that there is enlightenment, a way to enlightenment, and those who have practiced rightly so can declare that path? I think the Jain have faith, maybe from a Buddhist perspective in the wrong place but they have faith.
Please differentiate between "can not have" and "don't have". "Don't have" doesn't mean "can not have".
In Buddhist context, 'faith' means faith in Tathagata.
Of course if you talk about Jainism, 'faith' means faith in Jainism.
That seams false!
it was a question in the guise of a statement, in other words there is more to faith than in one thing. The now underlined part above is a statement of faith both Buddhists and non-buddhist can have faith in. The Buddha had faith that enlightenment is possible BTW.
Last edited by DNS on Tue Nov 06, 2012 4:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: moderator note: posts relating to jhana have been moved to the great jhana debate
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Post Reply